http://saffron-consultants.com/2008/11/14/chanel-the-latest-victim-of-brand-self-absorption/ Because branding starts with thought, not process Sun, 22 Aug 2010 11:17:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 http://saffron-consultants.com/2008/11/14/chanel-the-latest-victim-of-brand-self-absorption/comment-page-1/#comment-43 JR Little Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:40:42 +0000 http://saffron-consultants.com/?p=2072#comment-43 I must preface by admitting that I did not get a chance to enter the pavilion. At the time, I was so turned off by Chanel’s sponsorship that I discredited the project altogether. So, everything I say about the exhibit should be taken with a grain of salt. Having watched these two videos, I regret not seeing the pavilion. I’ve never really been a fan of Zaha Hadid’s work. I can respect it. I love the biomorphic thing that she does. Reminds me of Bjorks video for All is Full of Love, directed by Chris Cunningham. Her buildings are robotic and organic at the same time. However, I tend to think that architecture should be about the needs of the space and not the desire of the architect to create a sculpture. Having said that, I found the second video on this post to be beautiful. I understand her more. Her buildings are alive and need to consume. In an eerie way, her pavilion seemed to lure people in and use them for it’s self-interests. This is ironic considering the artists relationship with Chanel. In my opinion, many collaborations between artists and major luxury brands are tacky. Don’t get me wrong, I understand that great art often needs sponsorships in order to exist. For example, I love the Brooklyn Academy of Music and one of their largest sponsors is Altria, maker of cigarettes and heart-clogging food. However, I feel that luxury brands should back-up and allow the art to take the lead. My fear is that the masses will not be able to differentiate between a marketing message and a high-art message. This collaboration was at its heart, a marketing initiative. However, sometimes the message is obvious and becomes art in itself. One must think of Andy Warhol and Takashi Murakami. These two artists were/are clear about their intentions and the whole idea of cobranding sort-of becomes art in itself. I think this is why the Chanel Hadid collaboration failed. To me, Chanel and Hadid do not share similar brand attributes. It’s not clear how they could use one another. Other than the matching seams of a Chanel purse with those of the pavilion, I don’t get it (remember, I didn’t enter the pavilion). But aside from the exhibit, I don’t see where these two brands (Hadid and Chanel) share similar attributes or personality traits. I’d venture to say that both the Hadid and Chanel brands were damaged by the collaboration. Hadid appears to have sold out on some level, whereas Chanel seem to be straying away from the brand’s core strengths. I think a more understandable partnership would have been between Hadid and Prada. Having said all this, Hadid’s pavilion was a gorgeous sculpture and the second video on this post was well-done. I can’t say that I am a fan of Chanel but I respect their attempt at trying something new. Maybe next time they should focus on their brand’s core differentiating qualities and build from there, instead of just picking a cool architect to make a cool building for their fierce purse. I must preface by admitting that I did not get a chance to enter the pavilion. At the time, I was so turned off by Chanel’s sponsorship that I discredited the project altogether. So, everything I say about the exhibit should be taken with a grain of salt. Having watched these two videos, I regret not seeing the pavilion.
I’ve never really been a fan of Zaha Hadid’s work. I can respect it. I love the biomorphic thing that she does. Reminds me of Bjorks video for All is Full of Love, directed by Chris Cunningham. Her buildings are robotic and organic at the same time. However, I tend to think that architecture should be about the needs of the space and not the desire of the architect to create a sculpture. Having said that, I found the second video on this post to be beautiful. I understand her more. Her buildings are alive and need to consume. In an eerie way, her pavilion seemed to lure people in and use them for it’s self-interests. This is ironic considering the artists relationship with Chanel.
In my opinion, many collaborations between artists and major luxury brands are tacky. Don’t get me wrong, I understand that great art often needs sponsorships in order to exist. For example, I love the Brooklyn Academy of Music and one of their largest sponsors is Altria, maker of cigarettes and heart-clogging food. However, I feel that luxury brands should back-up and allow the art to take the lead. My fear is that the masses will not be able to differentiate between a marketing message and a high-art message. This collaboration was at its heart, a marketing initiative. However, sometimes the message is obvious and becomes art in itself. One must think of Andy Warhol and Takashi Murakami. These two artists were/are clear about their intentions and the whole idea of cobranding sort-of becomes art in itself. I think this is why the Chanel Hadid collaboration failed.
To me, Chanel and Hadid do not share similar brand attributes. It’s not clear how they could use one another. Other than the matching seams of a Chanel purse with those of the pavilion, I don’t get it (remember, I didn’t enter the pavilion). But aside from the exhibit, I don’t see where these two brands (Hadid and Chanel) share similar attributes or personality traits. I’d venture to say that both the Hadid and Chanel brands were damaged by the collaboration. Hadid appears to have sold out on some level, whereas Chanel seem to be straying away from the brand’s core strengths. I think a more understandable partnership would have been between Hadid and Prada.
Having said all this, Hadid’s pavilion was a gorgeous sculpture and the second video on this post was well-done. I can’t say that I am a fan of Chanel but I respect their attempt at trying something new. Maybe next time they should focus on their brand’s core differentiating qualities and build from there, instead of just picking a cool architect to make a cool building for their fierce purse.

]]>